IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i2p980-d1025975.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fighting COVID-19 Misinformation through an Online Game Based on the Inoculation Theory: Analyzing the Mediating Effects of Perceived Threat and Persuasion Knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Jinjin Ma

    (School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

  • Yidi Chen

    (Department of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Huanya Zhu

    (School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

  • Yiqun Gan

    (School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic was accompanied by the rapid spread of misinformation through social media platforms. This study attempted to develop an online fake news game based on the inoculation theory, applicable to the pandemic context, and aimed at enhancing misinformation discrimination. It also tested whether perceived threat and persuasion knowledge serve as underlying mechanisms of the effects of the intervention on misinformation discrimination. In Study 1, we used online priming to examine the influence of inoculation on misinformation discrimination. In Study 2, we developed an online fake-news-game-based intervention and attempted to validate its effectiveness through a randomized controlled trial while also exploring the mediating roles of perceived threat and persuasion knowledge. In Study 1, brief inoculation information priming significantly enhanced the ability to recognize misinformation ( F (2.502) = 8.321, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.032). In Study 2, the five-day game-based intervention significantly enhanced the ability to recognize misinformation ( F (2.322) = 3.301, p = 0.038, η p 2 = 0.020). The mediation effect of persuasion knowledge was significant (β = 0.025, SE = 0.016, 95% CI = [0.034, 0.075]), while that of perceived threat was not significant. Online interventions based on the inoculation theory are effective in enhancing misinformation discrimination, and one of the underlying mechanisms of this effect lies in its promotion of persuasion knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Jinjin Ma & Yidi Chen & Huanya Zhu & Yiqun Gan, 2023. "Fighting COVID-19 Misinformation through an Online Game Based on the Inoculation Theory: Analyzing the Mediating Effects of Perceived Threat and Persuasion Knowledge," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:2:p:980-:d:1025975
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/2/980/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/2/980/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jon Roozenbeek & Sander van der Linden, 2019. "The fake news game: actively inoculating against the risk of misinformation," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(5), pages 570-580, May.
    2. Friestad, Marian & Wright, Peter, 1994. "The Persuasion Knowledge Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(1), pages 1-31, June.
    3. Jon Roozenbeek & Sander Linden, 2019. "Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Adam Kucharski, 2016. "Study epidemiology of fake news," Nature, Nature, vol. 540(7634), pages 525-525, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Angelika Bernsteiner & Thomas Schubatzky & Claudia Haagen-Schützenhöfer, 2023. "Misinformation as a Societal Problem in Times of Crisis: A Mixed-Methods Study with Future Teachers to Promote a Critical Attitude towards Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Roger D. Magarey & Christina M. Trexler, 2020. "Information: a missing component in understanding and mitigating social epidemics," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Danielle Caled & Mário J. Silva, 2022. "Digital media and misinformation: An outlook on multidisciplinary strategies against manipulation," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 123-159, May.
    3. Nadejda Komendantova & Love Ekenberg & Mattias Svahn & Aron Larsson & Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah & Myrsini Glinos & Vasilis Koulolias & Mats Danielson, 2021. "A value-driven approach to addressing misinformation in social media," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Lee, Alice J. & Ames, Daniel R., 2017. "“I can’t pay more” versus “It’s not worth more”: Divergent effects of constraint and disparagement rationales in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 16-28.
    5. Onete Cristian Bogdan & Chita Sandra Diana & Vargas Vanesa Madalina, 2020. "The impact of fake news on the real estate market," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 316-323, July.
    6. Suwelack, Thomas & Hogreve, Jens & Hoyer, Wayne D., 2011. "Understanding Money-Back Guarantees: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Outcomes," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 87(4), pages 462-478.
    7. Jon Roozenbeek & Stefan M. Herzog & Michael Geers & Ralf Kurvers & Mubashir Sultan & Sander van der Linden, 2022. "Susceptibility to misinformation is consistent across question framings and response modes and better explained by myside bias and partisanship than analytical thinking," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(3), pages 547-573, May.
    8. Jong Yoon Lee & Jae Hee Park & Jong Woo Jun, 2019. "Brand Webtoon as Sustainable Advertising in Korean Consumers: A Focus on Hierarchical Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-10, March.
    9. Skarmeas, Dionysis & Leonidou, Constantinos N., 2013. "When consumers doubt, Watch out! The role of CSR skepticism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 1831-1838.
    10. Mark Groza & Mya Pronschinske & Matthew Walker, 2011. "Perceived Organizational Motives and Consumer Responses to Proactive and Reactive CSR," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 639-652, September.
    11. Aaker, Jennifer L. & Brumbaugh, Anne M. & Grier, Sonya A., 2000. "Non-target Markets and Viewer Distinctiveness: The Impact of Target Marketing on Advertising Attitudes," Research Papers 1578, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    12. T. Poehlman & Ravi Dhar & John Bargh, 2016. "Sophisticated by Design: the Nonconscious Influence of Primed Concepts and Atmospheric Variables on Consumer Preferences," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 3(1), pages 48-61, March.
    13. Khantimirov, Denis & Karande, Kiran, 2018. "Complaint as a persuasion attempt: Front line employees’ perceptions of complaint legitimacy," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 68-76.
    14. Puccinelli, Nancy M. & Goodstein, Ronald C. & Grewal, Dhruv & Price, Robert & Raghubir, Priya & Stewart, David, 2009. "Customer Experience Management in Retailing: Understanding the Buying Process," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 15-30.
    15. Simonson, Itamar & Drolet, Aimee L., 2003. "Anchoring Effects on Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay and Willingness-to-Accept," Research Papers 1787, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    16. Román, Sergio & Riquelme, Isabel P. & Iacobucci, Dawn, 2023. "Fake or credible? Antecedents and consequences of perceived credibility in exaggerated online reviews," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    17. Inman, J.J. & Zeelenberg, M., 2002. "Regret in repeat purchase versus switching decisions : The attenuating role of decision justifiability," Other publications TiSEM 44060120-bd30-40e0-a97f-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Rosbergen, Edward & Wedel, Michel & Pieters, Rik, 1997. "Analyzing visual attention tot repeated print advertising using scanpath theory," Research Report 97B32, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    19. Singh, Jaywant & Crisafulli, Benedetta & Quamina, La Toya & Xue, Melanie Tao, 2020. "‘To trust or not to trust’: The impact of social media influencers on the reputation of corporate brands in crisis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 464-480.
    20. Simona Romani & Silvia Grappi & Richard P. Bagozzi, 2016. "Corporate Socially Responsible Initiatives and Their Effects on Consumption of Green Products," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 253-264, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:2:p:980-:d:1025975. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.